• Homepage
  • Policy Briefs
    • Policy Areas
      • 2030 Agenda and Development Cooperation
      • Infrastructure Investment and Financing
      • Social Cohesion and the Future of Welfare Systems
      • Migration
      • Sustainable Energy, Water and Food Systems
      • Trade, Investment and Growth
      • International Finance
      • Digital Transformation
  • IN THE SPOTLIGHT
  • Think Tanks
  • About
  • Contact

About
G20 Insights
  • Policy Briefs
    • Policy Areas
    • Latest Policy Briefs
  • Overarching Visions
  • Think Tanks
  • In The Spotlight
  • G20 Performance
G20 Insights
G20 Insights > Policy Briefs > Implementing Negative Interest Rates

Policy Area
International Finance

G20 Germany

Download as PDF Print
Share:

Implementing Negative Interest Rates

  • Leon Berkelmans (Lowy Institute)
September 1, 2017 | Last updated: December 10, 2020
Tags: International Financial Architecture

Leon Berkelmans discusses how deep negative interest rates can be implemented by eliminating the zero lower bound.


Challenge

There are many ways that this issue could be dealt with. A popular suggestion is that fiscal policy could be used in order to push up demand and generate inflation. The abolition of cash has also been suggested, so agents would not have the ability to transfer out of deposits. These suggestions have their drawbacks. The political process may not be able to deliver the fiscal stimulus at the right time, or in the right magnitude. Cash is the only means of transacting for the unbanked, which makes up around eight percent of US households.

There is an alternative. It involves breaking the one-for-one link between electronic (bank) money and physical currency. Essentially, there would be a time-varying exchange rate between paper money and money in the bank.

To understand this mechanism, first we must understand why physical currency imposes a constraint on how low interest rates can go. If interest rates became negative on a deposit account, meaning that account holders would see their balances fall over time, then there is an incentive to hold cash instead, which retains its nominal value.

In order to eliminate the constraint it is necessary to have physical cash fall in value. This is possible. It can be achieved by having physical cash trade at a time-varying exchange rate with electronic cash.

At present, if an individual has a dollar in their pocket, they can deposit it and have one dollar in their bank account. This one-to-one link can be broken, so that the depositor may be credited something different to their account. This exchange rate would be implemented by the central bank. Commercial banks have deposits at the central banks, which they redeem for physical cash when the need arises, or deposit excess physical cash when they have a surfeit. To implement an exchange rate of x physical dollars per electronic dollar, the central bank would deem that one electronic dollar on deposit at the central bank is worth x dollars of physical currency. This price would then be transmitted through the rest of the economy the same way as interest rate changes are transmitted through the economy from the central bank: through arbitrage.

If the one-to-one link between electronic money and physical cash is broken, then physical cash’s value can fall through a depreciating exchange rate. Suppose that the central bank wants to implement an interest rate of -10 percent for a year (it is unlikely this would ever happen, but this is for illustrative purposes). Then, if physical cash were to see its value stay the same, there would be a strong incentive to convert money on deposit into cash. On the other hand, suppose that the central bank were to have the value of physical cash depreciate by 10 percent over that year, so that by the end of the year one physical dollar is worth 90 electronic cents. Then, in that case, there is no incentive to hold cash, and the negative interest rate can be implemented.

When interest rates return to positive territory, the central bank could have the value of physical cash appreciate. In theory, there is no reason that we need the one-to-one link restored, so that the physical dollar could go up in value to the point that it would be worth more than an electronic dollar. However, it may be politically more palatable for normal operations to be resume when parity is restored. If that occurs, this framework would result in a world looking exactly like the one we have now most of the time.

If central banks could implement deep negative rates, this would have a strong stimulatory effect on demand when the economy needs it most. One analysis by Federal Reserve economists suggested that unemployment would have been 3 percentage points lower in 2012 had they been able to cut interest rates to negative 4 per cent.

Politically, this idea faces some difficulties. Many are hostile to negative rates. Setting an exchange rate between physical and electronic money could be viewed as financial sorcery. But with education, negative rates will become more accepted over time.

We have already seen policy rates in some countries go into negative territory, albeit by 0.75 percentage points at most. This means the taboo has already been broken. And the political battle can be won if the choice is set up for what it is: impose negative rates for a short time on some riskless assets, or accept elevated unemployment for years.

Economies have experienced varying exchange rates between types of monies before. For example, in the United States during the Free Banking Era in the United States between 1838 and 1863, thousands of different banknotes circulated, issued by different banks. These banknotes traded at varying exchange rates that depended, upon other things on distance from the issuing bank. There were tables of prices for currency distributed as part of publications called “bank note reporters”. This system did not cause chaos, and the proposal here is far simpler, at a time when information is far easier to come by.

How would this look to the person on the street? In normal times, exactly the same as the world looks today. At times of negative interest rates, there would be some changes. They may earn negative returns on their savings parked in a bank, but that is a feature not a bug. It would give them an incentive to move out of deposits into something else. The interest rate on borrowing would be lower, but it would take quite a severe shock for most borrowers to face negative rates. The borrowing rate most borrowers face is a substantial spread above the policy rate, so policy rates would have to be deeply negative before that Rubicon were crossed. Nonetheless, it is possible. Many governments are now borrowing at negative rates, and some private corporations have seen their bonds trade at negative rates.

Customers in shops would notice a difference. Physical cash would have a different value to electronic money, so there would be a different price depending upon the mode of payment. But to some extent, that happens already. Currently, cash payments are rewarded with a discount on some occasions in order to avoid credit card transaction fees.

Some wrinkles need to be ironed out before this is ready for prime-time. In particular, long term contracts made out in unspecified “dollars” would lend themselves to repayment in depreciated physical currency if no provision were made for the contingency. This could be avoided by having the government pass a law that said that unless otherwise specified, contracts had to be settled with physical currency. These and other wrinkles are by no means insurmountable.


Proposal

There are many ways that this issue could be dealt with. A popular suggestion is that fiscal policy could be used in order to push up demand and generate inflation. The abolition of cash has also been suggested, so agents would not have the ability to transfer out of deposits. These suggestions have their drawbacks. The political process may not be able to deliver the fiscal stimulus at the right time, or in the right magnitude. Cash is the only means of transacting for the unbanked, which makes up around eight percent of US households.

There is an alternative. It involves breaking the one-for-one link between electronic (bank) money and physical currency. Essentially, there would be a time-varying exchange rate between paper money and money in the bank.

To understand this mechanism, first we must understand why physical currency imposes a constraint on how low interest rates can go. If interest rates became negative on a deposit account, meaning that account holders would see their balances fall over time, then there is an incentive to hold cash instead, which retains its nominal value.

In order to eliminate the constraint it is necessary to have physical cash fall in value. This is possible. It can be achieved by having physical cash trade at a time-varying exchange rate with electronic cash.

At present, if an individual has a dollar in their pocket, they can deposit it and have one dollar in their bank account. This one-to-one link can be broken, so that the depositor may be credited something different to their account. This exchange rate would be implemented by the central bank. Commercial banks have deposits at the central banks, which they redeem for physical cash when the need arises, or deposit excess physical cash when they have a surfeit. To implement an exchange rate of x physical dollars per electronic dollar, the central bank would deem that one electronic dollar on deposit at the central bank is worth x dollars of physical currency. This price would then be transmitted through the rest of the economy the same way as interest rate changes are transmitted through the economy from the central bank: through arbitrage.

If the one-to-one link between electronic money and physical cash is broken, then physical cash’s value can fall through a depreciating exchange rate. Suppose that the central bank wants to implement an interest rate of -10 percent for a year (it is unlikely this would ever happen, but this is for illustrative purposes). Then, if physical cash were to see its value stay the same, there would be a strong incentive to convert money on deposit into cash. On the other hand, suppose that the central bank were to have the value of physical cash depreciate by 10 percent over that year, so that by the end of the year one physical dollar is worth 90 electronic cents. Then, in that case, there is no incentive to hold cash, and the negative interest rate can be implemented.

When interest rates return to positive territory, the central bank could have the value of physical cash appreciate. In theory, there is no reason that we need the one-to-one link restored, so that the physical dollar could go up in value to the point that it would be worth more than an electronic dollar. However, it may be politically more palatable for normal operations to be resume when parity is restored. If that occurs, this framework would result in a world looking exactly like the one we have now most of the time.

If central banks could implement deep negative rates, this would have a strong stimulatory effect on demand when the economy needs it most. One analysis by Federal Reserve economists suggested that unemployment would have been 3 percentage points lower in 2012 had they been able to cut interest rates to negative 4 per cent.

Politically, this idea faces some difficulties. Many are hostile to negative rates. Setting an exchange rate between physical and electronic money could be viewed as financial sorcery. But with education, negative rates will become more accepted over time.

We have already seen policy rates in some countries go into negative territory, albeit by 0.75 percentage points at most. This means the taboo has already been broken. And the political battle can be won if the choice is set up for what it is: impose negative rates for a short time on some riskless assets, or accept elevated unemployment for years.

Economies have experienced varying exchange rates between types of monies before. For example, in the United States during the Free Banking Era in the United States between 1838 and 1863, thousands of different banknotes circulated, issued by different banks. These banknotes traded at varying exchange rates that depended, upon other things on distance from the issuing bank. There were tables of prices for currency distributed as part of publications called “bank note reporters”. This system did not cause chaos, and the proposal here is far simpler, at a time when information is far easier to come by.

How would this look to the person on the street? In normal times, exactly the same as the world looks today. At times of negative interest rates, there would be some changes. They may earn negative returns on their savings parked in a bank, but that is a feature not a bug. It would give them an incentive to move out of deposits into something else. The interest rate on borrowing would be lower, but it would take quite a severe shock for most borrowers to face negative rates. The borrowing rate most borrowers face is a substantial spread above the policy rate, so policy rates would have to be deeply negative before that Rubicon were crossed. Nonetheless, it is possible. Many governments are now borrowing at negative rates, and some private corporations have seen their bonds trade at negative rates.

Customers in shops would notice a difference. Physical cash would have a different value to electronic money, so there would be a different price depending upon the mode of payment. But to some extent, that happens already. Currently, cash payments are rewarded with a discount on some occasions in order to avoid credit card transaction fees.

Some wrinkles need to be ironed out before this is ready for prime-time. In particular, long term contracts made out in unspecified “dollars” would lend themselves to repayment in depreciated physical currency if no provision were made for the contingency. This could be avoided by having the government pass a law that said that unless otherwise specified, contracts had to be settled with physical currency. These and other wrinkles are by no means insurmountable.



Download as PDF Print
Share:

Edit

Authors

Leon Berkelmans

Existing Initiatives & Analysis

Implementation Overview
Existing Agreements
Existing Policies and Monitoring
Analysis and Data

    Suggest more existing initiatives and analyses!

    Your suggestions will be sent to the authors.





    *We will only use your contact informations to contact you concerning your request. For further informations on handling your private data you can check our Privacy Policy.

    *necessary fields

    • Working Paper Series

       

       

    • Global Solutions Papers

      To the Economics E-Journal

    The authors are solely responsible for the content and their views do not necessarily
    represent the views or recommendations of their related institutions.

    Report this Page

    Latest Policy Briefs

    • Digital Transformation
      Treating Root Causes, not Symptoms: Regulating Problems of Surveillance and Personal Targeting in the Information Technology Industries

      As part of the Digital Markets Act, the EU Commission has proposed a new competition tool to address market power in the digital economy that is dominated by large online platforms. While limiting the power of US-based tech companies, such as Google or Facebook, can be helpful, we argue that limiting competition is not enough. Business models based on invasion of privacy and behavior modification are at the root of the associated problems stemming from their use are at the root of challenges to democracy and sustainability — in order to protect democracy and support sustainable development, Europe needs to develop alternatives to the current behaviorally targeted advertising business model. This policy brief discusses current alternatives to business models based on invasion of privacy and behavior modification, arguing that current alternatives need further development before implementation. To further support the development of new business models we argue in favor of regulatory sandboxes, digital ad revenue tax, reducing accumulation of data to technical necessity only, and adapting procedures and ethics from human subjects research.

      • Lance Bennett
      • Alan Borning
      • Marvin Landwehr
      • Daniela Stockmann
      • Volker Wulf
    • 2030 Agenda and Development Cooperation
      Dealing with interlinkages – A focused approach for implementing the SDGS and overcoming the Covid-19 crisis

      In 2020 and beyond, the Group of Twenty (G20) must invigorate its implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and respond to the COVID-19 crisis. Both challenges are global in nature and require a universal, integrated, and transformative response. Thus, the G20 should: (1) reorient its political agenda following the 2019 Global Sustainable Development Report’s proposal of six entry points for transformation, and focus on the “economy and finance” and “science and technology” levers; (2) reshape its working structures accordingly; (3) act collectively toward a science-based direction for sustainable development; and (4) ensure that the response and recovery measures regarding the COVID-19 crisis follow the spirit of the 2030 Agenda, and are conducive to achieving its sustainable development goals.

      • Imme Scholz (German Development Institute / Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE))
      • Adolf Kloke-Lesch (Sustainable Development Solutions Network Germany (SDSN Germany))
      • Robert Lepenies
      • Alex Godoy-Faúndez
      • Felix Moronta-Barrios
      • Anet Režek Jambrak
      • Armand Ketcha Malan Kablan
      • Tolu Oni
      • Moritz Riede
      • Yoko Shimpuku
      • Teresa Stoepler

    In The Spotlight

    T20 Italy recognizes Global Solutions Summit as associated event

    Global Solutions Summit has been recognized as an associated event by Think20 Italy under its G20 presidency. The Summit 2021 aims to support the T20 and G20 by bringing together top researchers, policymakers, business leaders and civil society representatives in a renowned […]


    A Project By
    Be part of G20 Insights!

    Contribute your expertise by sharing your Policy Brief.

    contact@g20-insights.org
    • Policy Briefs
      • Policy Areas
      • Latest Policy Briefs
      • Overarching Visions
    • Think Tanks
    • About
      • In the spotlight
      • About G20 Insights
      • Contact
      • Support
    Share:
    © Global Solutions Initiative Foundation gemeinnützige GmbH  |   Legal Notice | Privacy